Debate (1998) - "A chance to debate the future"

(The debate took place well before Google took over the news archive
from Deja.com. The links here may not all work properly since the take-over.
If so, it should be possible to find them by doing a search using the
word-in-title "DEBATE", author "Ward", for the dates
from start of March 1998 to end of May 1998).

FIRST & SECOND FAMILIES

Ms Harman: I invite the House to consider three further points. We face
some difficult choices in the necessary reform of child support.

First, what is the appropriate balance between the interests of the first
and second families?

MY STARTER FOR TEN

The Government's mantra is: "Children are entitled to the financial
and emotional support of both parents wherever they may live".
(The CSA is just concerned with the finance part). So let's look at
it from the child's point of view.

Take a particular parent (the "xxther" - mother or father
as you choose). Then ALL children of that xxther should get the SAME
financial support from that xxther as the rest. ("A child is for
life, not just for Christmas").

SIMPLE SYSTEM v TARGETED SYSTEM

Secondly, what is the right balance between a clear, simple and straightforward
system and a complex system that deals very closely with individual needs?

MY STARTER FOR TEN

The complexity of CSA assessment arises partly from an attempt to target
the money. Parts of the complexity results from attempts to close loopholes
and stop unneedy people receiving benefit. Other parts of the complexity
arise from an attempt to pay money to special needy cases (or avoid
collecting from needy cases) who would not receive money under a blanket
payment.

If CSA assessment were replaced by a much simpler scheme, with the
same total money available, I would expect that many needy people would
be worse off, and many unneedy people would be better off.

Maintenance based purely on a proportion of income ignores circumstance.
A person with new (post-separation) dependents may be worse off than
a person with no new dependents. An AP with a working, even highly-paid,
PWC may have the same maintenance assessment as an AP with a destitute
PWC.

The scheme should not be too simple. (Unless APs make assessment and
collection so hard that there is no choice - in that case, the APs themselves
suffer the consequences).

RETROSPECTIVE v JUST NEW CASES

Mr. Rendel: Does the Secretary of State expect any new formula to apply
only to new cases, or will it apply also to cases that have already been
agreed under CSA regulations--which would lead to difficulties such as
cases being reopened and redecided and a lot of losers?

Ms Harman: The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. We are trying
to reform a system, but it is difficult to do so when we have a great
tangle and a sense--and the reality--of injustice. For people who have
had incorrect awards made and those who have had correct awards made but
who have failed to pay, the issue of transitional arrangements will be
critical in achieving public confidence in the new and reformed system
that we should like to see evolve.

MY STARTER FOR TEN

Eventually it has to apply to all cases, not just new ones.

However, I recognise that, just like 1993, this may cause problems
with people who had managed to adjust to the existing system.

There may have to be agreed departures for a time - with a target that
the people concerned have to adjust their finances within (say) 3 years.

DEALING WITH DELAYING/NON-PAYERS

Mr. Wicks: Given that the great majority of mothers and children on income
support receive no child maintenance from their fathers, will the Secretary
of State consider setting a new target to tackle the tough cases: the
men who are determined never to pay a penny? In my advice surgery on Friday
night, I met a mother who had supplied all the information that was needed
to the CSA. Two years on, she is still not receiving a penny.

Ms Harman: My hon. Friend is absolutely right: there is a huge sense
of grievance among absent parents--usually fathers--when there is a delay
in assessing maintenance and then, suddenly, they are hit with large arrears
that might turn out to be incorrect; there is also a burning sense of
grievance among parents with care--usually mothers--that although a correct
award has been made, fathers sometimes avoid paying.

MY STARTER FOR TEN

I can understand the reluctance of people to cooperate with the current
CSA regime. Everyone agrees that it is very flakey.

This excuse cannot live forever. Anyone with a strong view should "speak
now or forever hold their peace".

Once the new system is in place, there should be a strong enforcement
system. In Wisconsin this includes losing licences (for example, driving
licences), etc.

I believe that once the new system is in place, it should represent
"how the UK handles child support", and set the standard for
the next generation.